Super Heavyweight .45 Colt Loads...

[Gun-adian]

Hi Guys.

I've been out of the loop for a while. It's good to be back learning from the Master Casters.

Here's my query.

I've just picked up a Lyman #457643 bullet mould for my Marlin Guide Gun. It casts out at 420 Gr. with W/W metal. Just for kicks I ran a couple of them through a .451 sizer die. They came out really nice.

I made up a couple of dummy rounds to see if they would chamber in my Ruger Blackhawk. They dropped right in and the OAL is fine.

I'm looking for load suggestions. I'm not after super thumpers here. If it turns out that way, fine. I just want to toss something heavy down range.

I'm using Starline brass. The powders I have on hand are Unique, Blue Dot, W231 and H110. I'm leaning towards the H110.

Thanks in advance.

Mike.

[felix]

Mike, all of those powders are too fast. Do yourself a favor and get a can of RL7 and load to the base of the boolit. No need to compress, so as to allow for different case lengths. ... felix

[StarMetal]

Unique and 231 ARE too fast....Bluedot...ah..on the medium side. But 110 definately is not. Hodgdon lists heavy loads for 45 LC and looking at that and also the 454 casuall , they were using 110 and 4227. For Winchester I'd say 296. I'll have to disagree with Felix on just one of the powders you listed, 110...it's not a fast powder. The RL7 he mentioned is good too, but he seems very opinionated about it, also it's listed as a rifle powder good for 45-70 and 450 Marlin. Being you have a 450 Marlin, RL7 might be ok for medium loads, you're not going to have alot of room in that 45 LC case with such a heavy bullet. If you have 110, use it...I don't see going out and buying another if you have that one. 231 is a very fast powder and very good for target loads in small capacity cartridges like the 38 special, the 45acp, to name just two. Unique is a step up, kind of middle of the road. Of the three faster powders you named Bluedot can be loaded alittle heavier...alot of 44mag owners like it for midrange and slightly hotter loads. With 296 you don't want to reduce the top load...with 110 Hodgdons does have starting and max load, but 110 is very close to and similar to 296.

Joe

[frank505]

I have shot some with 15 grains of Wc820(lot #47320) and 15.5. The pressure went way up with a half a grain increase. The bullet is a 420 grain ogival flat point with gas check and sixed to 453. From ww metal the nose slugged and erased the crimp groove and the first grease groove also. I would use Wc680 next time I load some but that will not be very soon. With H110 or 296 maybe start with 12 grains but do not use any faster powder as it will probably cut right through your cylinder and top strap.

[felix]

680 will work as well as RL7, but is a smite bit dirtier. Load like RL7, a full case full. One more time, H110/ww296 are both too fast for that weight of boolit. ... felix

[w30wcf]

Turning the clock back to 1977, I experimented with 350 gr. (457192) and 405 gr. (457193) bullets in a 7 1/2" .45 Colt Ruger for the intent purpose of knockiing down the full footed 55 lb. steel ram in IHMSA competition. THe .44 Mags with 240-265 gr. bullets were only about 70% positive and I that felt that the greater momentum produced by heavier bullets would greatly improve things. It did.

Since I was working in uncharted waters so to speak, I took it slow and easy.
I started with the 350 gr. bullet first with a light charge of 4227 and worked up from there. After trial and error, I settled on 20 grs. of 296 (same as H110) or 22 grs. of 4227 for just about 1,100 f.p.s. at the muzzle. Interestingly, 20 years later, Hodgdon came to the same conclusion in their Manual No. 26.

To Felix's point, a capacity load of RL7 (28 grs.) under this bullet gives similar ballistics in my .45 Marlin Cowboy Rifle as the above 2 loads (1,400 f.p.s. range - 24" barrel). I have not shot it in the revolver to this point. I have not worked with 680 in this application so I can't comment.

Moving on to the 405 gr bullet, I found that it takes up a lot of powder space.
17 grs. of 296 took up all the remaining case capacity. I started low and eventually worked up to 17 grs. of 296 which produced just over 1,000 f.p.s.
A case full of RL7 would probably produce 150 f.p.s. less or so.

The problem I found with the 405 gr. bullet is that even with the Ruger's sights all the way down, the bullets were still above the rams back at 200 meters.

The 350 gr. bullet worked great so that's what ended up sticking with. No full footed steel ram ever stood up to one of those .45 Colt propelled heavy weights!
I liked to kid the .44 Magnum boys telling them that I was shooting a 100 year old cartridge and wasn’t having any trouble knocking the rams down!

IHMSA decided to offset the rams in about 1980 for easier knockdown since some folks were stressing their guns to the limit, and in doing so, took some of the fun out of it for me. Safety first.

As with any new powder lot / firearm / bullet combination, back off at least 10% to start.

Have fun.

30wcf

[StarMetal]

w30wcf,

Well you proved my point that 110 and 296 ARE NOT too fast for that weight bullet. I was going to mention the that there's not much boiler room left after seating such a heavy long bullet that 110 and 296 might be the good. I got on alot of heavy loaded 45 LC sites and the powders that stood out for up to the high 300's weight class bullet were 110, 296, Lilgun, and 4227. But Felix made 110 and 296 sound like fast shotgun powders so I didn't post any of the websites. In my opinion I'd use that bullet in a rifle as it was intended for and if I wanted a heavy 45LC I'd look at some in the 300 gr class.

Joe

[felix]

The 45 colt cases are too easily damaged with pressures above 30K. Most guns in this caliber have chambers which are too large in diameter to support the bottom part of the case. Sooner or later, anything over 20K is going to collapse the little groove between the rim and the body, enough so that the run of the mill shell holders won't work any more. ... felix

[StarMetal]

Felix,

You're living in the past on 45 Long Colts....yeah in the old days they did have sloppy chambers. With todays CNC machinery tolerances are alot tighter and better in the handguns. I'll grant you that some of the 45 LC rifles, like my Model 94 have fat chambers. Here's a statement from a post on heavy loaded 45 LC forum and the guy quotes Linebaught and Ross Seyfred, both very knowledge about heavy loads in 45 LC revolvers:

One other point. I know how its a popular myth that the 45lc case
is weak and the 454 is stronger. John Linebaugh discounts this so I decided
to test it. Although I don't usually shoot 45lc cases in my Casull, I
wanted to see how strong the 45lc case really was. I loaded full house
Casull loads behind a 340gr Lbt. I loaded and reloaded the cases. They lasted
just as long as the more expensive casull brass. Conclusion: John Linebaugh
is right. ( also ross seyfreid as said that anything the 454 would do, the
45lc would, the only difference is the quality of the gun and chamber that
the brass is used in )

Joe

[454PB]

I don't load heavy for my .45 Colt, even though it is a Ruger BH. I own four .454 Casulls, and load 320 to 335 grain G.C. boolits, so see no need to stress the BH. A boolit as heavy as you want to use is out of my experience, but if I were trying it in one of my .454's, I think I'd try Lil'Gun. I've been using a lot of it with the boolits I cast, and have found it to be an excellent performer, matching or exceeding H-110 and WW 296, and without the the ignition/burn problems exhibited. It also is more dense, allowing deeper boolit seating if required.

I hope you can get enough velocity safely to stabilize a boolit that heavy.

[felix]

How many times were those colt cases shot at full tilt in your 94, Joe? What load did you use? Powder, boolit, etc. How old were your cases before you started the full tilt experiments? Older cases last longer because they are more brittle. Lasting here means the collapse of the extractor groove, enough so you can begin to feel the friction between the case and a typical shell holder. ... felix

[StarMetal]

454PB,

You bring up a good point. The 45 LC is the caliber I've been shooting the longest in my life. In fact it's the first centerfire revolver caliber I bought. And yes I have a 45 Blackhawk along with many more 45 LC handguns and rifles. When I was young I hotrodded, not anymore. I follow your belief, if you want a hot 45 LC buy a 454 Casull.

I questioned whether that heavy slug would stabilize too out of that Blackhawk. If I were going to use that slug often, I might persue it, if not and it's just to shoot, I'd forget it.

Joe

[felix]

Most colt 45 guns have 16 twist. More than enough for 500 grainers. The 94 I have has a 26 twist, and it shoots the 300 LBT perfectly. ... felix

[AnthonyB]

Joe, you are talking oranges to Felix's apples. Felix isn't questioning the strength of the 45 Colt case. He is pointing out that the mis-match between sizer die and chamber dimensions, especially when using a carbide die that sizes the entire case body to mouth diameter, will cause cases to fail quickly at that pressure level. I can't quote anything other than my own experience with a Ruger Vaquero that I no longer own. Tony

[StarMetal]

How many times were those colt cases shot at full tilt in your 94, Joe? What load did you use? Powder, boolit, etc. How old were your cases before you started the full tilt experiments? Older cases last longer because they are more brittle. Lasting here means the collapse of the extractor groove, enough so you can begin to feel the friction between the case and a typical shell holder. ... felix

Felix,

I shot both brand new Midway and Starline....and older WW's in that 94. I don't remember the exact grains, but the powder was IMR 4227...grains somewhere up in the high 20's. What I noticed the most, and what also put me on to that rifle having a fat chamber, was how the cases were bulged at the web much like a 45acp in an unsupported chamber. I shot them quite alot of times and ironically I never had one split. In fact I had cases split more in the revolvers then that sloppy ass Winchester chamber. Anyways after shooting them they extracted just fine...none ever stuck and the primers where much flatter then say a safe stiff load in my Blackhawk. I'd only shot a few hot loads in my Marlin Cowboy and it exhibiting nothing like the Winchester. The Winchester is truely the fattest 45LC chambered firearm I've ever owned. BUT...the dang thing shoot really good...and, well, I like it. I no longer shoot hot loads from it anymore, or any of my 45LC chambers guns. The bullets in those hot loads were 260 gr cast, both hard linotype and/or WW's and 250 jacketed from various manufactures...most the time Hornady or Sierra.

To be honest with you I've had more trouble with the 45 LC cases fitting the shell holders even when brand new and most the darn Winchester cases, althought the Remington's fit the shell holders better, the Winchesters outlasted the Remington's many times over. I've had alot of Winchester cases that the rims pulled off with RCBS shell holder (interesting note when that happen it usually ruined the shell holder too!) but then I settled on a Redding shell holder and it's held up just fine and worked alot better. Another thing too Felix, that Model 94 Winnie tears up the brass in the rim area mainly from the extractor...and believe it or not when you're cycling an empty out of the chamber and fresh round pops out othe magazine tube onto the carrier, it gets a rectangular dent put on the head of the case. The Marlin doesn't make the case what so ever.

Joe

[AnthonyB]

Just read my post and didn't intend to speak for you. I thunk that was what you intended, but may have been completely wrong. Tony

[StarMetal]

Joe, you are talking oranges to Felix's apples. Felix isn't questioning the strength of the 45 Colt case. He is pointing out that the mis-match between sizer die and chamber dimensions, especially when using a carbide die that sizes the entire case body to mouth diameter, will cause cases to fail quickly at that pressure level. I can't quote anything other than my own experience with a Ruger Vaquero that I no longer own. Tony

Tony,

I have both...the old lube type sizer and a set of Redding Titanium. Redding gives very good instructions on using their dies and particularly not to size all the ways down the cartridge like a lube type sizer die. I haven't noticed one iota difference in brass longevity using either method.

By the way, I'm not trying to pick on Felix. It's just that I've been shooting this caliber for alot of years and feel I know a tad about it. There are alot of myths out about and the main one being the brass is weaker. You've read the earlier post on that. It's really not...the important thing is chamber fit. The tighter the clearances are the more pressure the brass will hold. I had wanted a 45 LC because the 44mag was the BIG DADDY back then, and I always liked the underdog....turned out the 45 LC isn't any underdog anymore. Darn fine round...so is the 44 mag.

Joe

[StarMetal]

Felix,

You currently have anything in 45 Long Colt? Sounds like you like the cartridge, am I right?

Joe

[felix]

No problem, Tony.

Joe, 4227 does not come close to the velocity delivered by RL7 using a 300 grainer and for a considerable lower AVERAGE and PEAK pressure. The primers are not flat at all with a full case of RL7, and remain quite rounded, if you will. The same primer results with a case full of 680 using the 300 grainer, but the round gives a slightly higher trajectory by observation than that given by RL7. ... felix

[felix]

All of my colt 45 guns have chambers big enough to fit 457 boolits. ... felix

[StarMetal]

Felix,

One thing about the powders you mentioned I don't think that fellow wanting to load such a heavy bullet will get into much trouble, it's definately safer.

I had some of those hot loaded 4227's with the cast bullet and some of my standard loads which were the same bullet but over 9.0 grs of Unique. I was shooting at big rocks about the size of large honeydews. Where as the 9.0 Unique load was just hitting them and that was all, the 4227 loads powdered them! That impressed me.

Joe

[AnthonyB]

Joe:
I know my brass suffered using RCBS carbide dies and the load of H110 I regularly poured under the LBT 300 WFN when I owned that revolter. Going to a set of regular dies and "neck" sizing helped considerably, but I could never get the same case life I got with 44 Magnums. I may be wrong, but I attributed the shorter life to the 45's oversize chambers. The tight throats had been cured by John Gallagher, but he couldn't put metal back in the cylinders and I wasn't willing to pay the price for a line-bored cylinder from his shop.
A buddy wanted that custom revolter far more than he wanted a Sako Forrester Mannlicher Carbine in 308 Winchester, so we made a trade. I had to cast an ***load of the LBT's and load them in new Starline brass to make the trade even by my standards, and we both left happy. I doubt he will ever shoot all the ammo I traded, but he will be ready if the elk ever try to take over his garden.
As for picking on Felix, I ain't worried about that at all...
Tony

[StarMetal]

Tony,

If I were going to buy carbide dies, they'd be Redding Titanium only. Those are just beautiful and like sizing butter.

You have any 45 LC's at the present?

You know speaking of the old lube dies, I still use the old RCBS's on my 45acp's BECAUSE the 45acp is suppose to be slightly tapered and carbide dies don't size them that ways. I feel they are better sized the way they were shaped in the beginning.

Joe

[felix]

Joe, I don't impress very easily because I really don't care all that much about power. I enjoy the sleeper approach, much like torque over horsepower in your terms. Power to me is when a 280 grainer out of a Whelen going about 1900 hit a foot thick highway section broadside and cracked it, leaving about 5 or 6 radial spurs with only a small spot at the point of impact. The same gun only knocked a big chunk off the side when shooting a 180 grainer at 2400. Respectively, an earth quake versus a hand grenade. ... felix

[StarMetal]

Felix,

I agree with you, I don't push even rifle loads with jacketed. Like the old adage I say about an old 427 Vette with tri power carbs...you can't drive it at redline everywhere you go. Just there when you need it.

Let me ask you this Felix. I've tried it in the past, but not to a big degree. 44man is the latest one to talk about it and that is just neck sizing your revolver cases. Have you ever done that and got into it much? What was your take on it if you have done so? Sure would help those oversized 45 LC chambers that some guns seem to have.

Joe

[felix]

Neck sizing is the ONLY way to go in EVERYTHING. The problem exists when the case collapses, like in the 45 colt case design there is not enough thickness above the extractor groove. It's pretty bad when the sidewall comes down, or the case head comes up, during recoil. The sidewalls are just too thin, or better yet, the head length is too thin. Better yet, just make the extractor groove wider, moving the sidewalls up to compensate. The case volume would not have to change that much to really improve that case strength where it is needed. ... felix

[Bullshop]

If ya want stout 45 colt brass why dont ya just trim back 454 casull brass, or did I mis sumthin?
BIC/BS

[StarMetal]

Dan,

In one of the heavy load forums a good number of the guys agreed that the 454 cases didn't fare any better in tight chambered revolvers then the 45 LC brass. They did say the smaller primer was better.

Joe

[Lee]

[smilie=w: Keep goin' gentlemen! I don't have much ta say on this one, but I got a lotta listenin' ta do. Veeerrrryy informative thread.......................Lee:-D

[454PB]

Just recently I began getting case failures in a particular lot of Freedom Arms .454 brass (which is no longer made). This lot of brass was acquired with the first .454 I bought in 1992, and had been fired 15 times. 75% of those loadings were full house, and the failures were mouth splits, which is typical and expected. Just for S&Giggles, I sectioned some of the brass with a hacksaw. There was no discernible thinning of the brass at the head. Since I own three handguns in .454, I always size the cases fully in a carbide die. If full length sizing shortens the life, I haven't seen any evidence of that.

A friend and co-worker (back when I had to work) owned a Marlin Cowboy in .45 Colt, and his brass failed by nearly full length body splits after three firings. He finally sent the gun back to Marlin for repair, it had an oversize chamber.

IMHO, brass life is determined by it's fit in the gun, and if that gun has a loose chamber it either needs repair or partial resizing of the brass. In my .454's, they are all so tightly chambered, it's a non existant problem

[Lloyd Smale]

personaly i wouldnt bother. We done enough long range shooting and penetration testing so show that anything over 350 grain in the 45 is to heavy. Ideal weight seems to be in the 320 range. Im not a big fan of velocity. I am a firm believer in John Linebauhs theroys on ammo. But for optimum penetration you need about 1100 fps and for truely good long range shooting I like 1100-1300 fps and you cant get these velocites out of a 400 grain bullet. They just take up to much powder space. In the 454 out of a custom handgun that has a long enough cylinder then maybe. But 350s seem about optimum in a 454 at least as far as our test results. Bottom line is if you feel you need to use 400s for knockdown power or penetration or for any other reason its time to step up the a 480 or 475 as they handle the extra weight alot better. I wont argue that you can make it work. Ive actually killed animals with a 405 rcbs 4570 bullet in the 45 colt but there are better solutions to the problem.

[Bass Ackward]

Let me ask you this Felix. I've tried it in the past, but not to a big degree. 44man is the latest one to talk about it and that is just neck sizing your revolver cases. Have you ever done that and got into it much? What was your take on it if you have done so? Sure would help those oversized 45 LC chambers that some guns seem to have.

Joe


Joe,

I see Felix already answered this, but I will add to it. Neck sizing will actually keep your chambers cleaner because the case will seal faster at lower pressures. Maybe to the point that cleaning cycles are extended.

If you have large chambers in a any gun, it can make a difference with many loads for accuracy too. Mostly the slow burners. Is this because it created better alignment? Or just because it sealed and alowed the same chamber pressure for good ignition? Who knows.

[w30wcf]

I agree with Felix. Neck sizing is the way to go. I've been doing it for my .45 Colt's since the 80's and haven't looked back. As Bass Ackward indicated the fireformed cases also eliminate blow by.

w30wcf

[felix]

Ric, I think a typical Casull case is actually smaller in diameter than a Colt case, making things even worse (in large chambers). But, the case head strength is where the advantage is, so you may be right in the end in using Casull cases in all colt 45s where they would fit or sawed off to fit. It's just too bad the cartidge had mixed up feelings about what size to be all along. ... felix

[lar45]

Back int he early 90's I started loading 405's sized down to .452" for my 45 colt Ruger 4 5/8" stainless Blackhawk.
A friend of mine had just got his Linebaugh made 475 on a Bisley and I wanted to see just how close I could come with the 45 Colt. I started with BlueDot and got to around 1200fps when I ruined the cylinder. It has a spiral crack looking line in one of the chambers.
Luckily for my my buddies 475 started life as a 45 so I bought the Biley cylinder from him and fit it to my gun.
Looking back, I'm sure that BlueDot was way too fast for this application.
I used to shoot only Winchester brass in my 45 and it held up rather well. I was most always loading on the hot side. It's a sickness I guess and I just can't help my self.
More Powder, Bigger Bullets.... Well I try to stay a bit more on the sane side of things these days.
When I got my 6.5" Taurus 454, I tried the 405's again, but this time with 296. I got up to 1500fps and the brass started sticking real bad. The bullets never did stabilize. Most went through the target sideways, but still grouped fairly well at 25 yds.?? I think that was probably the last time I got stupid with loading way beyond where I should have been.
Incedently it seems that Winchesters brass from around 2000 ish went to crap. I was getting full length case splits from factory ammo and radial splits with mild handloads in the 454. Others were reporting similar things with rifle loads.
I've switched to Starline for the 454 and Top Hat for the 45 Colt.

later
Glenn.

[Cherokee]

This has been a very interesting discussion, thanks gentlemen !!

[Kwahe]

Hi. I want to update this thread with some new and modern information...also in order to find out if anyone else has updated info on this topic.

415 gr Beartooth bullets in .45 Colt (advertised as 405 grains).

I’ve been interested in the discussion about using super-size bullets in the .45 Colt. A few shooters report that they have done it. Beartooth bullets has on its Load Share site a reference to one of these buffalo bullets fired from a Blackhawk revolver. The shooter achieved 1050 fps using 16 grains of LilGun but made no comment about group size or flight characteristics of this load, other than it being what the shooter considered a “max” load. So I thought I would try using a rifle and this load.

The rifle is a Rossi Model 1892 with a 24 inch barrel in .45 Colt. It has a peep sight setup. The discussion becomes more complex here because the twist rate is thought to be too slow (1 in 30) to stabilize a big bullet like the 415 grain Beartooth . Previous experimentation showed excellent accuracy with 340 grain Beartooths using 20 grains of LilGun and even better accuracy with 13.5 grains of the same powder. Stabilization of that bullet is predicted by various formulae and shooting proved the point. So there are 2 points of contention here: 1) Some people think it’s suicide and stupid to shoot a 415 out of the “little” .45 Colt, and 2)Mathematics predicts a lack of stable flight in the ’92 Rossi.

So I pieced together some loads with this hunk a’ lead. I used new modern Starline cases, Federal Magnum Large pistol primers, LilGun and 5744 powders. My OAL is 1.785 inches, which fits my chamber just fine. I set the targets at 25 yards to begin with and was able to eliminate 5744 as a viable powder, as even at that minimal distance, group size was shotgun-like. Likewise with LilGun in 10, 11 and 12 gr loads. But LilGun in 14 and 16 grains was a tad over ¾ inches. So I loaded up several rounds using those amounts. I will say that there was no room to spare in the 16-grain loads.

At 50 yards both loads produced 2-inch groups (5 shots each). There was no evidence of keyholing. At 75 yards, the 14-grain load spread out to 6 inches, with still no evidence of keyholes. But the 16-grain load held to 2 inches. Out at 100 yards, the 14 grain bullets scattered pretty convincingly and 2 holes showed some keyholing. But the 16-grain loads stayed in a 4 ½ inch group and no keyholes. The 14 grain load went an average of 1119 fps. The 16-grainers went 1312 fps. I had some fun, then, breaking clay pigeons with the bigger load. It’s a pretty hefty recoil and in fact punishing considering the shape of the ’92 buttstock.

I saw none of the usual signs of exceeding max pressures. Cases fell out of the chamber. I even measured the cases about a ¼ inch from the rims and compared those measurements to CorBon 300 grain +p factory load spent cases. The big 415 bulged the cases around 0.001 inches more than the CorBons. My authority in measuring cases and estimating pressures comes from the inimical Ken Waters who made case measuring into a veritable science. He said case expansion up to 0.0015 inches is acceptable for firearms equipped to handle 48,000 psi.

So, the upshot of my little experiment is this: complete and utter refutation of fringe internet ‘wisdom’ concerning the use of a giant bullet in a .45 Colt with a relatively slow twist. This rifle shoots 415s just fine given sufficient powder and velocity. I encourage others to work up to that load and find out if you can replicate my findings. The load is identical to the Sharps load the buffalo hunters used 150 years ago. I bet it still works.

[DougGuy]

So, the upshot of my little experiment is this: complete and utter refutation of fringe internet ‘wisdom’ concerning the use of a giant bullet in a .45 Colt with a relatively slow twist.

I wouldn't quite go as far as to claim "complete and utter." That term would be true with a 520gr oilcan flying out of a .45 Colt case at Mach 1 or better but to be honest, you are only a little bit over what most consider the point of diminishing return for the caliber, this being 340-350gr.

The fact that you are shooting this load out of a rifle gives it a redeeming quality, not achievable in a shorter barreled revolver. In short, if it worked good, many of us here would be onto it but the fact is that it is a little beyond the optimum heavy boolit load for this caliber and the efficiency falls off rather quickly after 325gr or so, regardless of what powder you use to propel it with.